Sieber v. Frink
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal from 'District Court of Custer County. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHelm, J.
There was no error in allowing the answer to be filed. No default had been entered after the statutory period for answering expired, and it is doubtful if leave of court even was necessary, unless § 75 of the code may be construed as requiring such leave [§ 78, Code of 1883]; for it is said that the office of a default is “to *150limit the time during which the defendant may file his answer,” and that “if plaintiff fail to take a default before trial it is a favor to the defendant.” Drake v. Davenick, 45 Cal. 463; Manville v. Parks, ante, p. 128.
Certainly when, as in this case, application is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Stearus v. AguirreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Drake v. DuvenickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
- Ophir Silver Mining Co. v. CarpenterNevada Supreme Court · 1868
- Williams v. Benton.California Supreme Court · 1864
- State v. McGinnisNevada Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by78 opinions
- Maricopa County Municipal Water Conservation District Number One v. Southwest Cotton Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1931
- Santa Fe Trail Ranches Property Owners Ass'n v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1999
- City & County of Denver v. Northern Colorado Water Conservancy DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1955
- Union Mill & Mining Co. v. DangbergU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1897
- Farmers Canal Co. v. FrankNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.